Posted on 11/03/2014 6:47:05 AM PST by YankeeReb
Exactly. Think they and others wouldn’t follow suit?
Thanks!
Point conceded.
Oh please, this is satire/political parody. Why is a warning label even necessary!?
Part of the fun of good satire is that moment when you realize, “Geez, he really had me going!”
It’s not Orson Welles in “War of the Worlds” throwing an entire nation into panic (even after he warned his radio audience at the start that it was fiction).
The real problem is this crazy world we live in where the real headlines are more bizarre than anybody’s fertile imagination.
Satire warning label.....come on.
;^)
No, Semmens satire is much better and much much closer to the truth.
I completely agree. I have just now caught up to the big 'dustup' over FR 'Satire Warnings' now. Good grief. I think that someone getting angry over being fooled by a satire article is way too full of themselves. Scott Ott/Scrappleface, Iowahawk, John Semmens ... have been posted at FR for over a decade without a need to regulate with rules to placate bruised egos.
Like the kidnap victim who is forced to write a ransom note, and then ends it with,
“This is no joke. I am enclosing a joke so that you will be able to tell the difference.”
;^)
interesting, but I wasn’t condemning or condoning anything. I guess I’m a little curious as to what brought the comment on.
now that’s some quality satire...
I’m not the OP, that was apparently their responsibility. I just pinged the OP and let them know I did that as a common courtesy.
One problem is that some people don't seem to have that realization. (Multiple people in this thread seem to have taken this "satire" as true.)
This problem alone can lead to other problems: "A lot of people come to FR and scan the headlines clicking on articles of interest. If they're not familiar with the author or source, they may be misled and may even pass it on to others."
Besides, not everyone has the same idea of fun or wants to click on threads where the source is satire. (I clicked on it because I was skeptical and suspected either wild rumor or an unlabeled satire thread. Since it looked like satire, I was thinking about posting what I did quote had no one already quoted it here.)
“In order to balance the books on this important change, we will transition to zero employees, effective this week.
The $15 per hour we would have paid to employees, will instead be used for restaurant robots.”
Well....you sorta gotta point there, that not all readers at FR are hardened FReepers accustomed to biting satire, and may be neophytes possibly easily misled. They forward posts thinking them real, and mistruths are thus spread.
But I reiterate that the best satire is that which skates closest to the truth where the line between fact & fiction becomes blurred. Satire is a heady brew that can delude novitiate minds not used to the stronger stuff. Unfortunately, online is not the place to shoo the children to bed while the adults partake of adult beverages. Got that.
But you’ll have to admit, McDonald’s acceding to a $15 minimum wage in a high cost of living city is not improbable. What that doesn’t prevent them from doing is investing in automation.
As noted, the industrial war between labor & management over automation is ongoing & stretches over many decades.
I’m still a teensy skeptical about the need for a label, “Warning, satire follows. Reader discretion advised.”
;^)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.